Profiting From the Pet Boom - Kanebridge News
Share Button

Profiting From the Pet Boom

By ABBY SCHULTZ
Mon, Oct 2, 2023 11:58amGrey Clock 4 min

Humans may not be acquiring pets at a pandemic-induced pace anymore, but they still are spending plenty on food, supplies, and services to take care of the furry members of their families.

Investors in public and private markets have their eyes on all that pet-care spending. Increasingly, consumers have gone beyond buying kibble to snapping up premium products and services that ensure their pets are living healthy, environmentally friendly lives. It’s a trend familiar to anyone who has followed the growth in eco-friendly wellness products and services for humans.

The shorthand for this phenomenon? The “humanisation of pets,” according to Milwaukee-based Baird.

“What that meant 10 years ago was you started to see the premiumisation of the quality of the diets and the emergence of grain-free brands and premium, cleaner-labeled food brands,” says Spencer DePree, a director in Baird’s global consumer and retail group. “That certainly is true today, but you’re starting to see that expand into other parts of the lifestyle of the pet.”

The entire pet economy is valued at about US$130 billion to US$140 billion, divided into four main categories: nutrition, products and supplies, healthcare, and services, according to Baird. Nutrition products snag most consumer dollars, but the so-called humanisation trend touches all of them.

Australia, Canada, and parts of Europe are leading the pet-market conversion to “non-traditional, more premium food and nutrition,” says Scott Ehlen, a director in Baird’s global consumer investment banking group. For the U.S., it’s a question of “how quickly, not if,” the trend will take hold, Ehlen says.

Penta spoke with DePree and Ehlen about what’s driving the growth in pet-related purchases and some of the companies on their radar screen.

Proactive vs. Reactive

One reason for the uptick in purchases of healthier pet products is consumers have realised they can proactively keep their pets happy and free from illness. The simplest step is to provide them with a diet that won’t lead to health problems in future years, and, as with humans, mix in nutritional supplements and treats with health benefits, such as dental care.

“That’s something you’ve seen in human wellness over the last five to seven years,” DePree says.

In pet food, that’s led companies to go beyond making grain-free kibble to producing fresh foods and to offering “toppers,” such as fish oils or freeze-dried raw meat. Companies are even developing foods that don’t rely on traditional beef and poultry proteins, such as Berkeley, Calif.-based Jiminy’s insect-based pet foods—a company backed by venture capital, according to private-markets data company PitchBook.

“Their value proposition is pretty impressive when you just look at the energy consumption that goes into producing a pound of beef,” DePree says.

As people spent more time at home with their pets during the pandemic, they also realised their furry companions have a lot of downtime. Humans that have returned to the office want to make sure their pets stay happy and active, so many are putting their dogs in daycare facilities with cameras that allow them to check in to see how their pup is doing.

“It’s not a kennel, it’s doggy daycare, where it’s analogous to taking your child to daycare,” Ehlen says.

There are a handful of franchisors backed by private equity in this sector including Dogtopia, which Ehlen says is one of the larger companies with at least 200 franchisees and more in the pipeline. An investment vehicle formed by the New York-based private-equity firm Red Barn Equity Partners with funding from institutions and family offices made a major investment in 2020 in the company, which offers daycare, boarding, and spa facilities, according to a news release.

Pet grooming is another area that’s prime for investment. Ehlen says he takes his own dog to a groomer who keeps track of appointments on a paper calendar. “It’s impossible to get a hold of her, impossible to schedule,” he says.

“A vast majority of the market continues to exist in that state in 2023,” Ehlen says. “You’re finally starting to see folks realise that this is a huge market, it’s a non-discretionary market, it’s going to be around forever. It’s just in desperate need of investment, of capital, of innovation.”

The ‘Pet’ Play in Food

The importance of pets to the economy is evident within the four major consumer products companies—Mars, Nestlé, Post Holdings, and General Mills. All include pet foods among their brands; Post, in fact, made a push into the business in February by purchasing Nature’s Way and Rachael Ray Nutrish, among other more standard pet food brands, from J.M. Smucker Co. for $1.2 billion.

For an investor interested in the growth of premium natural pet food, the only pure public-market play is Freshpet, based in Secaucus, N.J., DePree says.

While bigger companies have grabbed more market share, independent, private companies are “still the birthplace of new brands, new innovation, and that could be coming from either new companies or new product lines,” he says. “When the category validates itself or the scale hits, then you may see one of the bigger players jump in through an acquisition.”

Independent companies in the natural pet food space include the Farmer’s Dog, based in New York, which is backed by venture capital, according to Pitchbook. Denver-based Alphia, a pet food co-manufacturer that supplies other companies, was bought late last month by PAI Partners, a private-equity firm, from another PE firm, J.H. Whitney, according to a news release.

In March, the specialty pet food brand Natural Balance, announced it would merge with Canidae, which makes premium sustainable pet food, a news release said.

Before the stock market became more volatile last year, there was a “big queue of folks circling the wagons,” DePree says. Considering that the large consumer products companies are still trying to figure out how to grow this market, “over the next 18, 24 months, you’ll see some more stories become public.” For now, he says, “the demand for ways to play ‘pet’ outstrips the supply.”

The Internet-of-Things for Dogs

Pets aren’t exempt from humans’ obsession with tech, either. The latest pet-tech trends range from fitness trackers to food-monitoring devices that not only monitor how much and when your pet is eating, but also automatically order more food when you’re running low, DePree says.

Old-tech—such as electronic fences that keep dogs confined to a designated space—are being replaced by devices considered more humane and able to collect data on a pet’s behaviour, Ehlen says.

An example is Halo Collar, which uses wireless GPS and allows owners to set up zones to contain their pets wherever they are. The company, based in Woodcliff, N.J., and co-founded by dog psychologist Cesar Millan and tech innovator Ken Ehrman, was backed in May by Utah-based Decathlon Capital Partners, which provides revenue-based financing.

Most innovations in the pet economy so far have focused on dogs, but Ehlen and DePree say companies also have their sights on improving the lives of cats.

“If anyone is doing any innovation in cat, it’s alongside dog, but now you’re starting to see a more purpose-driven and specific sort of focus on the category,” DePress says. But he chides, “cats might be insulted at the humanisation concept—they probably hold themselves in a higher place.”



MOST POPULAR

What a quarter-million dollars gets you in the western capital.

Alexandre de Betak and his wife are focusing on their most personal project yet.

Related Stories
Money
Worldwide Efforts to Reverse the Baby Shortage Are Falling Flat
By CHELSEY DULANEY 15/10/2024
Money
Why Iconic Brands Struggle With Innovation
By LISA WARD 15/10/2024
Money
The Trick to Bragging in a Job Interview
By ALINA DIZIK 14/10/2024

Subsidised minivans, no income taxes: Countries have rolled out a range of benefits to encourage bigger families, with no luck

By CHELSEY DULANEY
Tue, Oct 15, 2024 7 min

Imagine if having children came with more than $150,000 in cheap loans, a subsidised minivan and a lifetime exemption from income taxes.

Would people have more kids? The answer, it seems, is no.

These are among the benefits—along with cheap child care, extra vacation and free fertility treatments—that have been doled out to parents in different parts of Europe, a region at the forefront of the worldwide baby shortage. Europe’s overall population shrank during the pandemic and is on track to contract by about 40 million by 2050, according to United Nations statistics.

Birthrates have been falling across the developed world since the 1960s. But the decline hit Europe harder and faster than demographers expected—a foreshadowing of the sudden drop in the U.S. fertility rate in recent years.

Reversing the decline in birthrates has become a national priority among governments worldwide, including in China and Russia , where Vladimir Putin declared 2024 “the year of the family.” In the U.S., both Kamala Harris and Donald Trump have pledged to rethink the U.S.’s family policies . Harris wants to offer a $6,000 baby bonus. Trump has floated free in vitro fertilisation and tax deductions for parents.

Europe and other demographically challenged economies in Asia such as South Korea and Singapore have been pushing back against the demographic tide with lavish parental benefits for a generation. Yet falling fertility has persisted among nearly all age groups, incomes and education levels. Those who have many children often say they would have them even without the benefits. Those who don’t say the benefits don’t make enough of a difference.

Two European countries devote more resources to families than almost any other nation: Hungary and Norway. Despite their programs, they have fertility rates of 1.5 and 1.4 children for every woman, respectively—far below the replacement rate of 2.1, the level needed to keep the population steady. The U.S. fertility rate is 1.6.

Demographers suggest the reluctance to have kids is a fundamental cultural shift rather than a purely financial one.

“I used to say to myself, I’m too young. I have to finish my bachelor’s degree. I have to find a partner. Then suddenly I woke up and I was 28 years old, married, with a car and a house and a flexible job and there were no more excuses,” said Norwegian Nancy Lystad Herz. “Even though there are now no practical barriers, I realised that I don’t want children.”

The Hungarian model

Both Hungary and Norway spend more than 3% of GDP on their different approaches to promoting families—more than the amount they spend on their militaries, according to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.

Hungary says in recent years its spending on policies for families has exceeded 5% of GDP. The U.S. spends around 1% of GDP on family support through child tax credits and programs aimed at low-income Americans.

Hungary’s subsidised housing loan program has helped almost 250,000 families buy or upgrade their homes, the government says. Orsolya Kocsis, a 28-year-old working in human resources, knows having kids would help her and her husband buy a larger house in Budapest, but it isn’t enough to change her mind about not wanting children.

“If we were to say we’ll have two kids, we could basically buy a new house tomorrow,” she said. “But morally, I would not feel right having brought a life into this world to buy a house.”

Promoting baby-making, known as pro natalism, is a key plank of Prime Minister Viktor Orbán ’s broader populist agenda . Hungary’s biennial Budapest Demographic Summit has become a meeting ground for prominent conservative politicians and thinkers. Former Fox News anchor Tucker Carlson and JD Vance, Trump’s vice president pick, have lauded Orbán’s family policies.

Orbán portrays having children inside what he has called a “traditional” family model as a national duty, as well as an alternative to immigration for growing the population. The benefits for child-rearing in Hungary are mostly reserved for married, heterosexual, middle-class couples. Couples who divorce lose subsidised interest rates and in some cases have to pay back the support.

Hungary’s population, now less than 10 million, has been shrinking since the 1980s. The country is about the size of Indiana.

“Because there are so few of us, there’s always this fear that we are disappearing,” said Zsuzsanna Szelényi, program director at the CEU Democracy Institute and author of a book on Orbán.

Hungary’s fertility rate collapsed after the fall of the Soviet Union and by 2010 was down to 1.25 children for every woman. Orbán, a father of five, and his Fidesz party swept back into power that year after being ousted in the early 2000s. He expanded the family support system over the next decade.

Hungary’s fertility rate rose to 1.6 children for every woman in 2021. Ivett Szalma, an associate professor at Corvinus University of Budapest, said that like in many other countries, women in Hungary who had delayed having children after the global financial crisis were finally catching up.

Then progress stalled. Hungary’s fertility rate has fallen for the past two years. Around 51,500 babies have been born there this year through August, a 10% drop compared with the same period last year. Many Hungarian women cite underfunded public health and education systems and difficulties balancing work and family as part of their hesitation to have more children.

Anna Nagy, a 35-year-old former lawyer, had her son in January 2021. She received a loan of about $27,300 that she didn’t have to start paying back until he turned 3. Nagy had left her job before getting pregnant but still received government-funded maternity payments, equal to 70% of her former salary, for the first two years and a smaller amount for a third year.

She used to think she wanted two or three kids, but now only wants one. She is frustrated at the implication that demographic challenges are her responsibility to solve. Economists point to increased immigration and a higher retirement age as other offsets to the financial strains on government budgets from a declining population.

“It’s not our duty as Hungarian women to keep the nation alive,” she said.

Big families

Hungary is especially generous to families who have several children, or who give birth at younger ages. Last year, the government announced it would restrict the loan program used by Nagy to women under 30. Families who pledge to have three or more children can get more than $150,000 in subsidised loans. Other benefits include a lifetime exemption from personal taxes for mothers with four or more kids, and up to seven extra annual vacation days for both parents.

Under another program that’s now expired, nearly 30,000 families used a subsidy to buy a minivan, the government said.

Critics of Hungary’s family policies say the money is wasted on people who would have had large families anyway. The government has also been criticised for excluding groups such as the minority Roma population and poorer Hungarians. Bank accounts, credit histories and a steady employment history are required for many of the incentives.

Orbán’s press office didn’t respond to requests for comment. Tünde Fűrész, head of a government-backed demographic research institute, disagreed that the policies are exclusionary and said the loans were used more heavily in economically depressed areas.

Eszter Gerencsér and her husband, Tamas, always wanted a big family. Photo: Akos Stiller for WSJ

Government programs weren’t a determining factor for Eszter Gerencsér, 37, who said she and her husband always wanted a big family. They have four children, ages 3 to 10.

They received about $62,800 in low-interest loans through government programs and $35,500 in grants. They used the money to buy and renovate a house outside of Budapest. After she had her fourth child, the government forgave $11,000 of the debt. Her family receives a monthly payment of about $40 a month for each child.

Most Hungarian women stay home with their children until they turn 2, after which maternity payments are reduced. Publicly run nurseries are free for large families like hers. Gerencsér worked on and off between her pregnancies and returned full-time to work, in a civil-service job, earlier this year.

She still thinks Hungarian society is stacked against mothers and said she struggled to find a job because employers worried she would have to take lots of time off.

The country’s international reputation as family-friendly is “what you call good marketing,” she said.

Gina Ekholt said the government’s policies have helped offset much of the costs of having a child. Photo: Signe Fuglesteg Luksengard for WSJ

Nordic largesse

Norway has been incentivising births for decades with generous parental leave and subsidised child care. New parents in Norway can share nearly a year of fully paid leave, or around 14 months at 80% pay. More than three months are reserved for fathers to encourage more equal caregiving. Mothers are entitled to take at least an hour at work to breast-feed or pump.

The government’s goal has never been explicitly to encourage people to have more children, but instead to make it easier for women to balance careers and children, said Trude Lappegard, a professor who researches demography at the University of Oslo. Norway doesn’t restrict benefits for unmarried parents or same-sex couples.

Its fertility rate of 1.4 children per woman has steadily fallen from nearly 2 in 2009. Unlike Hungary, Norway’s population is still growing for now, due mostly to immigration.

“It is difficult to say why the population is having fewer children,” Kjersti Toppe, the Norwegian Minister of Children and Families, said in an email. She said the government has increased monthly payments for parents and has formed a committee to investigate the baby bust and ways to reverse it.

More women in Norway are childless or have only one kid. The percentage of 45-year-old women with three or more children fell to 27.5% last year from 33% in 2010. Women are also waiting longer to have children—the average age at which women had their first child reached 30.3 last year. The global surge in housing costs and a longer timeline for getting established in careers likely plays a role, researchers say. Older first-time mothers can face obstacles: Women 35 and older are at higher risk of infertility and pregnancy complications.

Gina Ekholt, 39, said the government’s policies have helped offset much of the costs of having a child and allowed her to maintain her career as a senior adviser at the nonprofit Save the Children Norway. She had her daughter at age 34 after a round of state-subsidised IVF that cost about $1,600. She wanted to have more children but can’t because of fertility issues.

She receives a monthly stipend of about $160 a month, almost fully offsetting a $190 monthly nursery fee.

“On the economy side, it hasn’t made a bump. What’s been difficult for me is trying to have another kid,” she said. “The notion that we should have more kids, and you’re very selfish if you have only had one…those are the things that took a toll on me.”

Her friend Ewa Sapieżyńska, a 44-year-old Polish-Norwegian writer and social scientist with one son, has helped her see the upside of the one-child lifestyle. “For me, the decision is not about money. It’s about my life,” she said.